Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric, The problem is that conflicts abound to the point that I prefer a conflicted person as I know from whence they come. In your news business, certain writers and news organizations have a slant that I find very useful. For example, The Guardian in England is guaranteed to give me the left labor slant on the world: likewise, Jewish World Review is going to give me a pro Israeli slant on things. It is up to me to synthesis the facts and come to some understanding of what reality is. Anybody attached to the news business knows that editing is a very messy process; deciding in very short time frames what will run and what will not. Editors strive to be balanced but perfection isn't human. Another point would be listening to company insiders: frequently these people know more about all areas of an issue than you will ever want to know if you just talk to them. Yes, you will hear the corporate song, but you will also hear about the competing songs and what is accurate and what is not. Getting back to cameras, all the media is singing the praises of digital as that is what is good for business. Stores get to sell boxes, software houses get to create new products, news agencies get to write stories and how to's, and grandmother gets confused. As Karen and B.D. pointed out, now you get a JPEG and a smile not a print and a you are welcome. I am seeing a small backlash from some people who realize too late that a roll of film and $4.99 at Costco made more sense for them than $299 for a shiny new toy and hours at a Kiosk or a computer screen trying to figure out why the picture looked so good on their monitor and so green on Mom's prints. How does the above relate to conflict of interest you ask? Well, how many stories have you read stating the obvious: if you already have a film camera that works, why would you spend hundreds of dollars to get a device that causes you to spend time and effort to do what you can do now by throwing a roll of film at some clerk and say you will be back in an hour and the flesh tones had better look good. Digital has a strong place in the world, rabid photographers, news, catalog, media, military, business record keeping, etc. But for family memory keeping, the kind of folks Karen was talking about who shoot a roll every two or three months, digital is nuts. 0.02 Don dorysrus@mindspring.com - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of eric@jphotog.com Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 2:02 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Conflict of Interest > "Conflict of interest" > I think this is one of those things that is way over used and cared Being a journalist, I am automatically suspiscious of people who hide their affiliation with anorganization. As for Erwin, I think he has established a reputation for his testing methodology. The manknows lens performance. And I have no idea what is official relationship is with Leica. If hegets equipment free to test, that's one thing. If they pay a substantial part of his yearlyincome, that's another. I'm not aware of any financial relatinship they may have. But thatwould call into quesiton his credibility if I didn't already know him to be honest to a fault inhis reviews. (In the sense that he truly believes what his tests tell him. There is no deceptiongoing on). I do know that he gets information ahead of the rest of us. Which only makes senseconsidering what he does for Leica in terms of benefitting them with test results that usuallymake them look good. That's becuase their lenses are good. Not becuase Erwin isobsequious. He is not. But anyone who doesn't see conflict of interest as a problem in the context of any reportageis naive. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html